Trial reportScientific reports2026
Comparing the effect of mental fatigue-inducing models on selected cognitive and technical performance aspects in young soccer players.
Trial report in Scientific reports, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Assessing mental fatigue in football: a systematic review.Frontiers in sports and active living · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Mental fatigue is a well-documented performance inhibitor in team sports, Therefore, identifying strategies to attenuate mental fatigue seems necessary. This study aimed to evaluate and compare four distinct training models—Modified Stroop, SAFT90, T-SAFT90, and a combined T-SAFT90 + Stroop protocol—to identify the most effective method for inducing mental fatigue under controlled laboratory conditions, as a potential model for brain endurance training (BET) research in young soccer players. Fifteen male players (aged 16–18) participated in a randomized cross-over study. Mental fatigue was assessed via a Visual Analogue Scale (VAS; primary outcome), cognitive performance (secondary outcomes) was evaluated through response time, response accuracy, working memory capacity, visual Scanning Identification, and auditory pattern recognition. Technical performance was measured using penalty time, movement time and passing accuracy in the Loughborough Soccer Passing Test (LSPT; primary outcomes). All protocols significantly increased mental fatigue, with the largest effect observed in the combined T-SAFT90 + Stroop model. Response accuracy declined across all models, while response time worsened in the Stroop and T-SAFT90 conditions. Penalty time increased in the Stroop and T-SAFT90 protocols, whereas passing accuracy decreased most significantly in the combined model. In summary, under standardized, controlled conditions, the combined cognitive-physical training model induced the highest mental fatigue and most consistently altered cognitive and technical performance. These findings provide preliminary evidence supporting its potential as a BET model for research and structured training environments, though ecological validation in real soccer contexts remains necessary.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.